For me, multiple careers/jobs is one of the biggies. I grew up in a blue collar house where my parents worked at their respective companies for decades (two of them for my father). They worked until it was time to retire, with no expectations - or idea really - that they could or should do something else. It's just…

I'm SURE I remember a story about a guy who invented a device that could detect plant screams. Seems to me there was a scene some woods and when a tree was chopped down it landed on the device... And maybe killed him... Or he went mad or something...? Is this ringing a bell for anyone else?

Sure, sequels, but a movie split into two parts (or three in the case of The Hobbit) are usually one year apart.

Justice League 1 & 2 being two years apart seems crazy. But the two Marvel dates in 2018 - May 4 and July 6 - could be interesting if they turn out to be a continuous story.

And I thought the Walking Dead premiere was going to give me nightmares...

Here's my question: if HIS headline was misleading then why did you use the essentially the same headline only to put out that his article didn't bear out the headline? #Clickbaiter #AndClearlyItWorked

The plan:
Hood, May 2016
Tuck, July 2016
Nottingham, November 2016
Hood 2: Revenge of the Merry, May 2017
John, July 2017
Red, November 2017
Tuck 2: Into the Friar Pan, May 2018
Hood 3: Merry's End, July 2018

So the story will be that Pine-Kirk sets out to change the timeline in order to prevent this horrible future from happening.

Clearly there is nothing magical about peer review and my perception of it is... idealistic, though not uncommon I think. I guess I've always thought of it as being like a code review among developers. (Which I've done many times.) But that analogy breaks under, well, peer review... (See what I did there?)

Wow, I had no idea. I guess I always trusted the phrase "peer reviewed" but it sounds like it's becoming a bit like the label "Organic".

So I guess it's as much about the perception of something being published in a peer-reviewed journal as being stamped, "Proven To Be True!" as opposed to, "Not Disproved".

I'm asking this because I don't know: why doesn't the peer review process catch these? Should that be reevaluated?

I hope a close up of it reveals the words, "Reply hazy try again"

The headline says "David Finch". And I love that take on Star Wars.

While there is the risk of the signal-to-noise ratio getting too low, more volunteers means more open discussion. Which is usually a good thing. So sign me up!

Hopefully Batman V Superman will be half as much fun as these tweets.

Just finished: "Strange Sweet Song" by Adi Rule. An acquaintance whose book I stumbled on in a book store. Very nice blend of magic, myth and music schools.

Birth? There's an app for that!

They are totally NOT ripping off The Walking Dead. They're ripping off one arc of one season of The Walking Dead.